One thing I’ve learned from Prince Harry’s many lawsuits is that there’s a committee of political and royal flunkies deciding who gets royal protection and who doesn’t. The committee is called Ravec, and it’s made up of senior courtiers and a few government people. As Harry’s lawsuits have revealed, Ravec seemingly makes their decisions based off of anything but “legitimate security threat.” Royal protection has become an extension of royal preference and standing within the family. The removal of protection is seen as a legitimate punitive measure within the family, as opposed to a willfully dangerous tactic leaving public figures open to bodily harm. None of the people in Ravec believe that security should follow the threat. They believe security should follow the rank, and that security is just another way to show how important and royal you are. Speaking of, Prince Andrew wants his taxpayer-funded security back, and he’s roped in the Home Secretary.

Disgraced Prince Andrew has launched a bid to win back his £3million-a-year taxpayer-funded armed security detail. The Duke of York, 63, was stripped of of police protection after paying millions to settle a civil sex assault case brought by Virginia Giuffre. But The Sun can today reveal the royal outcast is fighting back, despite being banished from frontline duties — and has won the backing of former Home Secretary Priti Patel.

She has emailed King Charles’s top aide suggesting a review of the duke’s protection “could be something to consider”. Ms Patel also referred to the ditching of Prince Harry’s security detail. But Charles’s private secretary Sir Clive Alderton has no power over royal security arrangements — and Ms Patel was forced to apologise to the King when her approach was leaked yesterday.

Royal expert Ingrid Seward said last night: “The King will be deeply embarrassed by this — the issue is so controversial he won’t go anywhere near it. Ms Patel should have known he has no power over these decisions. Her meddling was deeply unwise and deeply unfair on The King — and will damage Andrew’s cause, not help it. And the bottom line remains, why should the public pay £3million a year to protect a man who rarely leaves his home?”

Ms Patel’s intervention came after she discussed Andrew’s security woes with his PR guru pal Mark Gallagher. She refused to say who she emailed — but apologised to the King when we revealed Sir Clive’s name had been leaked. Ms Patel, 51, said: “It is disappointing that this correspondence has been leaked into the public domain and I apologise to His Majesty for the embarrassment and difficulties the publishing of this correspondence has caused.”

[From The Sun]

“Ms Patel should have known he has no power over these decisions” – I’m sorry, what? King Charles’s senior courtiers sit on Ravec, as do Home Office officials. If Charles wanted Andrew to have his RPOs back, he would. What’s even weirder is that Charles reportedly IS paying for Andrew’s security, but that money is coming from the Duchy of Lancaster, as opposed to the British taxpayer. That’s what Buckingham Palace leaked last December – that Charles was dealing with the issue privately and paying the £3 million annual cost out of Lancaster funds. Are they now saying that was a lie? Besides that, the £3 million story revealed that Charles could have easily found a work-around for the Sussexes’ security, especially when they were visiting the UK. Except Harry is suing Ravec just to be able to pay back police security.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, Cover Images.